Pamela B. Gann, the president of Claremont McKenna College, a small, selective liberal arts college in California, admitted on Monday that a “senior administrator” had been submitting inflated SAT data to ratings agencies since 2005, in an apparent effort to increase the college’s standing. My colleague Richard Pérez-Peña and I report in Tuesday’s Times that Richard C. Vos, vice president and dean of admissions, is believed to be the source of the false information, and the only individual involved.

In our article, we quote Ms. Gann as writing in an open letter to students and faculty that the critical reading and math scores of Claremont McKenna students that were reported to U.S. News & World Report and others “were generally inflated by an average of 10-20 points each.” For the class that entered the college in September 2010 — the most recent set of figures made public — the combined median score of 1,400 was reported as 1,410, she said, while the 75th percentile score of 1,480 was reported as 1,510.

The article continues:

Even such small differences could influence the rankings, and the deception underscores the importance those rankings have taken on, as colleges fret over the loss of even a notch or two against their competitors.

Robert Franek, the senior vice president for publishing at The Princeton Review, which provides preparation for the SAT and also ranks colleges, said that he had never heard of a college intentionally reporting incorrect data.

“We want to put out very clear information so that students can make an informed decision about their school,” Mr. Franek said. “I feel like so many schools have a very clear obligation to college-bound students to report this information honestly.”

The Princeton Review bases its college rankings on student opinion rather than test data, Mr. Franek said, so he was uncertain whether a change as small as had been reported would make a difference.

“It’s hard for me to say, but that is a small percentage,” Mr. Franek added. “That is a pretty mild difference in a point score. That said, 10 points, 30 points to a student that isn’t getting that score on the SAT could be an important distinction.”

How do readers of The Choice react to this news? And how might it affect how much stock you put in the rankings of U.S. News, Princeton Review and other publications? Please use the comment box below to let us know.

Well, the kids cheat by buying higher test scores via prep classes, rather than actually learning more and reading and writing more. Since the scores aren’t really measuring what they claim to measure, what’s the big deal here?
Oh yes … adults are supposed to be honest.
Good luck with that.

This is not at all unusual in higher education today. With so much emphasis put on the special numbers to get a high rank in US News and World Report, there are quite a few schools cooking the books on retention rates, SAT scores, class size, spending, etc. It’s rife with corruption. Just last year Iona College in New Rochelle had its provost caught cooking the numbers for its business college’s accreditation. There’s little to no oversight by accrediting agencies, the government or US News and World Report, so the administrators outright lie to protect their institutions’ position and their own paychecks. Is anyone really surprised?

So why are we surprised? The US News Rankings are rather thin soup to begin with. It is well known that many schools skew the numbers the way many US corporations slightly cook the books before a quarter, then unwind things until the end of quarter comes around again so the markets are pleased. But then is anyone really paying attention or how many care when the large Division I schools also play their make-believe that the “scholar athlete” gets an education, and that the university gives them an education. Fantasy is the operative word for all of them.

At least they admitted it and didn’t try to cover it up. All the Claremonts have been becoming increasingly popular in the last few years, and while it’s regrettable that false information may have had a small bit to do with that in the case of Claremont McKenna, the fact remains that all 5 of the Claremont undergrad institutions are excellent institutions and their popularity does not come from their test score averages alone, but also their appeal in a wide variety of other factors.

“the deception underscores the importance those rankings have taken on, as colleges fret over the loss of even a notch or two against their competitors”.

Since the Federal government requires the reporting of this data to IPEDS, will there be some kind of criminal sanction for this fraudulent behavior? That Mr. Vos may possibly be fretting over this loss of several notches in the rankings from behind bars would be a huge personal price to pay for fraud perpetrated in the name of keeping up that magic number in US News list. I hope for his sake that Claremont McKenna has some top notch attorneys to clean up the mess he made. I wonder if he acted alone in this – it seems awfully likely that someone else was in the know. And, I really wonder how many other schools who participate in the rankings are gaming them in similar ways.

Is this story not enough to convince people that the SAT arms race is completely out of control? The rankings race is now so crazy that an institution of the caliber of Claremont McKenna feels compelled to lie and cheat to recruit students – what a sad commentary on the state of higher education. All done for the sake of money and prestige.

How will the cheating by CM alter their ratings? In a world where so many people seem to have no ethical foundation (note at least one comment to this article) the result may be minimal. It should not be so. Without honesty and ethical behavior there is no basis for society. That should suffice to alter behavior away from Claremont McKenna.

So, kids on Long Island are cheating by paying others to take the test for them and are not punished, (schools were not notified that students they accepted had cheated). Colleges are cheating by lying about the scores they accept and the only recourse is saying “our bad”. There has to be some repercussions when these things happen or we are giving the message that the system is there to be gamed. Moral hazard is not just a Wall St. term.

As the father of a high school senior right in the thick of the college admissions season, with all the anxiety that comes with it, I actually am pretty shocked. Not that a school would state false numbers — this is a business after all, and a competitive one, with big money at stake — but rather that a very well-regarded school like CM would stoop this low. I have become very cynical about the whole thing — ivy league and near-ivy colleges dumping tons of mail on my son enticing him to apply (he is not ivy caliber) just so that they can deny him to pad their own stats and climb higher in the US News rankings. Using my son as a tool to enrich their status — this really makes me angry. My only hope as I read this article is maybe, just maybe, this is the wake up call to everyone involved — that this process is WAY out of control, and needs to be reformed. It starts with silencing US News by not cooperating with their ranking process. I won’t hold my breath though, as there is no incentive for schools to behave ethically and fairly, and I do not foresee top schools showing the necessary leadership by simply opting out of the US News rankings entirely.

It will be interesting to see if this incident results in other colleges self auditing the information they have been providing that is being utilized by these ranking institutions. With no real oversight or verifications, some transparency could be beneficial.

It’s really quite remarkable: we see cheating by students (the SAT scandal on Long Island), teachers (the scandal in Atlanta public schools), and now even college administrators. The over-emphasis on these few, flawed high-stakes standardized tests is leading to its (perhaps inevitable) conclusion: great scores by any means necessary.

I propose a new uncertainty principle: any statistic used to measure the quality of an organization will eventually become useless in measuring the quality of an organization.

All measures will be gamed. At one time the number of national merit scholars attending an institution might indicate the quality. Now it more often indicates which schools are willing to pay the most to national merit scholars to come to the school. You don’t need to falsely report SAT scores for your entering class, just do what USC does and only admit the students with the highest SAT scores in the fall. Admit the rest of the class for the following term so their scores are not reported.

Anyone who believes that Claremont McKenna is the only college cooking the books when it comes to their test scores and “average” GPAs, class ranks, etc. is living in a dream world.

Unfortunately, applicants are the ones who suffer the resulting anxiety. What message are we giving to high school students when we tell them that they are “not good enough” for certain schools based on a single exam score — and then it turns out that the reported scores are rigged?

Everyone has lost sight as to the meaning of a liberal arts education. Great thinkers, fascinating well educated people are not defined by test scores and grades; especially not by slivering it down to 10 points difference on the SAT, or .1 difference in GPA. I’m appalled at the high school level that ‘education’ has been reduced to trained seals that are poised to answer test questions and suck up for grades. The ability to think about an issue, ask insightful questions, derive any meaning from any of the material has vanished; and so has any desire to learn, for the sake of learning. College ranking has to stop, at best it should be by tiers. There is no difference between #5 and #10 on the list, as an employer I might find a Pomona credential interesting versus say a Colorado State University grad (and no difference between Pomona and Claremont); but when I get them in the interview, it’s going to be their energy level, commitment, and maturity that impresses me. If I interviewed blind to college attended, I probably wouldn’t be able to guess where they had gone. You would think 160k would have a bigger effect.

Our family toured Claremont McKenna last spring. We heard a consistent message about how focused on leadership the college was, how great the internship and post-college opportunities were, and of course, how competitive the application process was.

The college prides itself on preparing leaders for business and government. The problem, as we reflected on it later, was that we couldn’t get a sense of what values the college advanced that would provide a foundation for students aiming for leadership.

Of course, this was the briefest of encounters. My son decided not to apply, but some of his friends did. For their sake and the college’s, I hope this incident inspires some serious soul searching.

I agree with those of you who believe this was predictable. I find it hard to believe that those who do the rankings would be surprised by it. When there is a clear incentive to cheat — there will be cheating. I also agree that it is sad. We knew we were supposed to take these rankings with a grain of salt. This is just a reminder. I also agree that we should applaud Claremont McKenna for reporting the problem. This increases their integrity in my eyes.

While I do not condone in ANY way falsifying the test scores, bear in mind the kind of pressure that a upper level administrator must be facing. While on the outside we can weigh in, point a finger, and proclaim “that was wrong” what must a person in this position face to even entertain the NOTION of reporting false information.
I mean really? How does a person get to that point?

I’m sorry, I AGREE THIS IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE AND WRONG, but do consider:

This not only affects the administrator! It affects the office, the family, the community, the credibility of the school. CMC has lost not only an employee, but it’s credibility!